Get Administering targeted social programs in Latin America: PDF

This booklet contains case experiences of 30 social courses from eleven Latin American international locations and offers precious classes approximately concentrating on various social courses. those prone comprise the supply of college lunches, nutrients stamps, day care, scholar reduction, money funds, unemployment counsel, housing mortgages, and foodstuff commodities and subsidies. details is equipped at the management expenses, specifications, and innovations for focusing on social companies. Case by means of case, the booklet indicates how the various courses controlled to stability provider advancements opposed to the fee of focusing on to lead them to low-priced. It additionally describes the commonest focusing on tools and identifies which programmes used them and why.

Additional resources for Administering targeted social programs in Latin America: from platitudes to practice, Page 94

Sample text

Page 7 2 In Theory: Costs and Benefits of Targeting What Is Targeting? In this book, targeting refers specifically to the identification of those who will or will not be eligible for a social program. Targeting carries with it the idea that some groups of individuals should be excluded from receiving the program benefit. Policymakers are most often concerned with delivering welfare transfers (either cash or in-kind) to the poor. In contrast, in health programs, it may be the ill or those who are at risk who are targeted.

Reporting Targeting Accuracy Calculating errors of inclusion and exclusion is the most complete way of evaluating targeting outcomes. However, it requires a firmly-defined poverty line, which may not exist. It also requires knowing as much about those who do not benefit from a program as about those who do, which is also not always possible. Furthermore, comparisons among programs with different poverty lines are somewhat difficult to interpret. We will, therefore, review a somewhat simpler way of judging targeting outcomes.

Suppose that these programs are in different countries with different poverty lines. Country A has set its poverty line to take in the first and second quintile, while in Country B, only the first quintile would fall below the poverty line. In this case, Program A's leakage (benefits accruing to quintiles 35) would be 45 percent of benefits whereas Program B's leakage (benefits accruing to quintiles 25) would be 55 percent of leakage. Expressed this way, Program B performs less well than Program A, but purely because it is being judged by a higher standard.